C

that's awesome

It would have been technically impossible to fake what was seen on tv in 1969. From a technology stand point.

apollo missions were amazing

ah

thanks

@AwwNutz amazingly fake

yees

@Citizen Z you think the footage shown on tv wasn't real?

The pivotal claim for the Apollo hoax theory without which all falls apart, is that what we saw on tv was slow motion footage of astronauts running around in a film studio.

no its not

Pictures are proof something exists now? I have pictures of bigfoot and lock ness monster

@Udo ya that wouldn't work would it

Because if it wasn’t slow motion, it couldn’t have happened on Earth, right

the rate at which objects fall is not linear, and slowing it down is linear

h=1/2At^2 but slowing it down would make it a different function

Anyone know anything about how slow motion is produced in film cameras?

There are two ways to make motion slow:
One is, you shoot it at normal speed, and play it back slow.
One is, you shoot it fast and play it back normal.
The second way is called ‘Overcranking’. It looks smoother and more realistic because you’re sampling natural motion at a higher frame rate. But that means they would’ve had to shoot it on film using high speed film cameras, right? Why

@Udo I dont' know myself, how is it done

In 1969 there were no high-speed video cameras yet. Some people did have magnetic disk recorders that could capture normal speed video and play it back slow. They used it for sports replays; it could record up to 30 seconds. Play back at 10 fps and you got a whopping 90 seconds of slowmo. I say 10 FPS because that was the video framerate for Apollo 11

They had a Non-Interlaced Slow Scan TV camera specially made for them by Westing House. All the later missions were using regular NTSC video cameras running at 29,97 FPS. That would be 3x harder to fake

Your point?

I'm getting there if you'd let me.

Or this guy can spam